The guys are up on my roof right now installing the solar panels on my house, a rarity in Brooklyn. I'm having 18 panels installed where my roof is pitched 37 degrees. NYC latitude is 40 degrees so almost perfect. It will produce 6.66kw of power, and 8905kwh over the course of a year. That should be enough to keep my M3SR+ going for a long time and will only need superchargers on long trips. Free transport! Well free after buying the car and the solar install. The solar will pay for itself in 4.5 years based on current usage and electric rates and then will truly be free.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Solar panels going up right now.
- Thread starter Zacster
- Start date
RayK
Active Member
Welcome to the solar club! I've had rooftop solar since Nov. 2010. There's 20 185W panels up there and last calendar year it generated 5.85MWh. Based on your figures, I'm assuming that you have 360-370W panels. Solar companies always seem to be generous with their estimates of power so don't be surprised to only get a bit less than 6kW instantaneous power, but of course most of it depends upon your local weather.
Yes, they are 370W panels. The output of the panels has gone up as the price has come down. I'd looked into solar about 10 years ago and the payback period was something like 19 years and we decided that just wasn't worth it, plus I had 3 kids in college. This time though it was a no-brainer even if output is somewhat less than promised. The yearly output is 110% of current usage, and honestly I don't know what to do with the extra 10% other than to keep the AC on more than we do now. It is net metered so no battery backups.
RayK
Active Member
Which is why I'm looking into updating my system with newer, more efficient panels. My payback period was 14 years so I'm only a few years short of "breaking even". One problem here though is that the utility companies (namely, PG&E in my case) is pushing to further reduce our existing net metering benefits. At this point, I'm willing to accept these losses as we're probably not going to be in this house after 10 years or so; I'm retired and the cost-of-living here is pretty high. Having solar should be a good selling point even if the panels will be about 1/2 way through their lifespan.
As it was getting dark here the installers had to call it a day and hopefully they'll be back tomorrow if it isn't raining. The one thing I noticed is that there were only 17 panels on the side of the house, not the 18 in the plans. They couldn't get the 370w panels so they subbed 405w panels instead, but needed one less to get me the promised power. If they'd have asked in advance though I'd have told them to just use 18 of the larger ones and I'd pay the difference on settlement. I'm getting 6.885kw rather than 6.66. Minor difference in my favor.
There is absolutely, positively, 100% no way that can be generalized, even by adding" for most". It depends on the neighborhood, demographics of the neighborhood, desirability of extra power, etc.
(pre CA NEM changes)
In some places, having solar panels can be a negative to your home value. In others, it can add 5-6%. All depends on what the specific neighborhood is like. Real estate professionals in my specific neighborhood say that having solar panels that are paid for (not leased) adds about 4-5% to home value.
I agree with H2ofun's statement as a general expectation here in NorCal.
The real estate agent that I went through to buy my home said that solar already installed or a home that was a prime "solar candidate" with a perfect Southward facing roof had zero impact to housing costs. It's all about location, bedrooms, bathrooms, and renovations people care about like the kitchen and master. He's been selling homes for like 25 years and said there wasn't a single time he helped someone sell or buy where the solar panels became an additional value to the transaction price.
He said solar can hurt a home sale though; a PPA / Lease-with-lien / or FERA will absolutely nuke a sale and could cost a homeowner tens of thousands. So he always advises homeowners to pay off solar before they list a house for sale.
I think a home like h2ofun's may prove to be an odd exception just because the value of his solar and battery is soooo goddamn high. I mean his house has so many panels and like $35,000 of Powerwalls. So on one hand his solar is very super valuable. But then if he loses NEM grandfathering, nobody will want all that solar hah.
For itty-bitty-teeny-weenies like myself (6.7 kWp AC solar), it's basically an immediate zero for the impact of the transaction sale price. I better get my ROI from the energy savings instead of trying to re-coup on the back end. Or, in my case, I get ROI from enjoying some peak-time AC in the summer and running my electric dryer and dishwasher during peak time because I don't want to have chores go past 10pm. Unfortunately no home buyer is going to give a damn about these things.
Oh, and I refinanced after installing solar and powerwalls. The appraiser said "bank underwriters don't care" when I brought up that I had installed owned-solar-and-batteries.
If NEM 3.0 ends up being a big liability, I can see how sellers will be punished for having solar under a PTO/export agreement. Suddenly bank underwriters will include a monthly $100 cash out as a drag to free cash flow and that precious DTI they need to ensure people don't get over-leveraged. PG&E basically becomes a lender of sorts because the home buyer has to pay hundreds a month of a recurring liability to PG&E.
Just doing the math, a 8kW $12,000 post-tax credit solar panel system on the roof is less than 1% the value of an average $1.5M home in a nice/decent suburb of Los Angeles or Silicon Valley.
If under NEM2 it saves $15,000 of energy bills over the next decade, that's still under 1% of the home value assuming the housing bubble bursts and never recovers.
If under NEM2 it saves $15,000 of energy bills over the next decade, that's still under 1% of the home value assuming the housing bubble bursts and never recovers.
thesmokingman
Active Member
Really? I turned into a total wattage scrooge. The wife's always turning on AC and we end up fighting over the Nest control lol.
thesmokingman
Active Member
No offense to appraisers in general, but the very few that I have had to deal with couldn't manage to value a $2 bill in my estimation. One literally photographed the driveway of my property and three others in the county (not even this zip code) as a basis for an appraisal value. The other appraisals may have been more detailed, but were grounded in "comparable" homes that weren't actually comparable, other than, yes, they were houses (different age, design, bedroom #s, areas for both home and lot...) Regardless, what we happened to value in this particular parcel had to do with the classic phrase "location, location, location", which turns up on nobody's appraisal. My point being that properties change hands for sometimes the quirkiest of reasons. (e.g. Next door to mom, no backyard neighbors, has a tree swing, on a corner to show off, once belonged to _____…)
A nearby local home was designed by a deceased, internationally renowned architect, and one of a small handful in the US. That sale will certainly bump the county home sales price averages, but it is my belief that that particular sale has no relevance to virtually any other property transaction in the area.
Perhaps in a largely identical subdivision, you could run the numbers and work out what solar might be worth, but I think apples to apples home comparisons are tough for all of the idiosyncrasies in home buying. I overheard folks not bidding, or bidding on a home because of the colors, inside or outside. Talk about a cheap fix! I do think that the point of the potential added value of solar with respect to the magnitude of the home's price has merit. A potential 1% added value vs a 15% added value makes a difference in how easy it is to identify solar as part of the buying decision. (And "a home with solar" is a broad brush; there are folks here with 4kW systems and 40kW+systems.)
At the end of the day, when the house sells, you know the value of that house that day to those two parties; one was happy to sell, and one was happy to buy at that valuation.
All the best,
BG
A nearby local home was designed by a deceased, internationally renowned architect, and one of a small handful in the US. That sale will certainly bump the county home sales price averages, but it is my belief that that particular sale has no relevance to virtually any other property transaction in the area.
Perhaps in a largely identical subdivision, you could run the numbers and work out what solar might be worth, but I think apples to apples home comparisons are tough for all of the idiosyncrasies in home buying. I overheard folks not bidding, or bidding on a home because of the colors, inside or outside. Talk about a cheap fix! I do think that the point of the potential added value of solar with respect to the magnitude of the home's price has merit. A potential 1% added value vs a 15% added value makes a difference in how easy it is to identify solar as part of the buying decision. (And "a home with solar" is a broad brush; there are folks here with 4kW systems and 40kW+systems.)
At the end of the day, when the house sells, you know the value of that house that day to those two parties; one was happy to sell, and one was happy to buy at that valuation.
All the best,
BG
In so many cases, by the time one sells, the solar is basically obsolete, either by panel wattage or how much cheaper it is now!!! Plus with NEM3, who would want any solar?
I can say I didn't put solar in for the resale value, if any. I look at it this way, it isn't even the cost of a nice bathroom. My out of pocket expense is break even after 4-5 years and that cost is really a tiny fraction of the house value. In my neighborhood it is more a novelty than anything else.
I think with the housing market where it is, solar is not the deciding factor for almost all home buyers in many neighborhoods. They are 'lucky' to even get their offer picked honestly. When there are 10+ other offers on nearly every well priced house, it's too competitive. The home down the street from me is magically up 100k in 4 months in zillow? Seriously? Of course, my home is the cheapest for whatever reason, maybe it's because I blocked it out in google maps.
Arizona was up 32%+ in 1 year.
www.globest.com
I agree with some other post that realtors mostly only care whether the solar is owned or leased and that's about it. An added $25-50k value isn't going to change a home buyer's mind since they can install their own solar to their own specs/needs.
Arizona was up 32%+ in 1 year.
S&P CoreLogic Case-Shiller Continues to Slow | GlobeSt
CoreLogic HPI Forecast reported that home price growth will slow to about 3% by the last quarter of 2022.
www.globest.com
I agree with some other post that realtors mostly only care whether the solar is owned or leased and that's about it. An added $25-50k value isn't going to change a home buyer's mind since they can install their own solar to their own specs/needs.
